SolarWardenI don’t give damn about what range can the F-35 do on internal fuel and even less I give damn about what you call fair.. What’s the use of internal fuel if it comes with the same drag penalty as in wet bags, but cannot be jettisoned? LM would have done better making it smaller and dependable on wet bags, instead..
Somebody is a lil angry… or a certain undershort is in a bunch? 😀
SolarWardenHave to say, it has been amazing reading the overreaction to the test report on this forum.
First off, the purpose of the test pilot was not to extol the virtues of the aircraft but identify issues, weaknesses, and make recommendations. The test was departure resistance and AOA/pitch response in BFM. Not some “balls out” play to your strengths dogfight as evidenced by the setups. Speeds from: 440 to 380 knots- mid to low energy at check away.Pitch and yaw reponse-JPO and one of the test pilots had already alluded to any over dampened FCS had left some agility on the table because of transonic roll off, buffeting and wind drop encountered during testing ( especially on the “c”). The FCS control laws dictate the agility allowed in modern unstable designs ( yes the F-35 has negative stability just as all new fighters despite the comical utterings of Obligatory and others). Hence there is room for an easing in the control laws that would improve pitch and yaw rates as the buffeting ect. were less extreme than testing had suggested (at least for the “A”) The test report mentions the anti-spin logic forcefully negating the pilot imputs, not allowing for the use of offensive/defensive high alpha maneuvers. This can be tweaked, wether the clients feel it is imperative to do so is another matter. They may just leave the control laws alone for now as there are far more important software hurdles to cross.
On the matter of E/M, given the speed at the start of the tests, there is no way the pilot was making overall claims about the suitability of the aircraft to “dogfight” in all scenerios. His comments should not be surprising, an F-35 using high AOA and yaw at relatively low speeds is going to bleed energy, and not regain it as well as the two fighters mentioned. The F-15E has an absurd T/W ratio, and the F-16 was designed as an energy fighter, and does not go to high alpha in any case. There was no way that the F-35 would be an energy fighter on par with those two, I stated that myself. The F-35 has shown a good corner speed 370knts/9g/15,000ft. So it will have a good first turn. And it will bleed energy. What will be a disappointment is if the FCS is not tweaked for better pitch, roll, and yaw for as it loses speed: better responsiveness on those axis would provide a offensive look.
Tbh, other than the “soft” FCS laws, didn’t see anything in the report that was particularly surprising. After reading the last several pages on this tread, it is obvious that some posters are unaware of the purpose of flight test, simply want to bash what they still don’t grasp, or ignore the strengths and weaknesses of the fighter by painting too positive or too negative a picture based on a flight test excerpt.
Spot on. But the anti-F35mites are not going to care about the facts. To them this was a win and the justification of all the ranting they’ve done when it comes to the F-35. The only way (which is highly unlikely) they will shut up is when the F-35B goes up against F-15 F-16 aggressor squadrons up at Nellis and wins.
SolarWardenFirst of all way too much is being made of this test and some players are taking things seriously out of context to grind axes. So, what is of primary importance is to understand what the test objectives were. The FLTS’s out at Edwards don’t fly unless they have a clear objective to gather technical data, that’s what Developmental Test is all about. So, what were the objectives? From the report:
Please note that the object wasn’t to see how the F-35 stacked up to the Viper as a dogfight, rather it was to press the limits of the high AoA control laws and then report out the flying qualities in that regime, using various specified maneuvers. The Viper was there to make things dynamic and unscripted. Also, please note “elevated AoAs and aggressive stick/pedal inputs” are also preludes to departing an aircraft, so the evaluation of the effectiveness was how does the anti-spin logic effect high AoA BFM. Of course that’s exactly what the JPO statement said.
Next take a look at the setups:
All I have handy right now are the Block 50/52 performance charts, but they’re close enough to the 40 to show that the 3K, 6K and 9K setups are right at the sweet spots of the Viper’s performance.
[INDENT]Two 370’s Drag Index 70
22,000′ MSL 440 KCAS is 0.96M
20,000′ MSL 380 KCAS is 0.81M
Note assuming KCAS not KTAS since that’s what displays in the HUD and the EM chart below[/INDENT][ATTACH=CONFIG]238889[/ATTACH]
Puts things in perspective here. So, the Viper was flying right around it’s corner and max instantaneous, while the F-35 was supposed to go elevated AoA and see if the control laws would prevent the plane from departing when performing elevated AoA BFM. The Viper was at a clear advantage all along, but it wasn’t there to win, it was there as a visual reference to maneuver against. The whole point was to put the F-35 in a bad position and see what the control laws did. Which is exactly what the JPO said.
Turns out the early law are biased towards departure prevention(not a bad thing early in a program), not exactly an Earth shattering discovery, and that there’s plenty of margin available to improve performance, again not exactly Earth shattering. At least a sizable subset of these critics aren’t old enough to remember that the first wave of FBW A/C went through similar cycle or didn’t pay attention/forgot that Super Bug and Raptor did also.
Now with the critic’s original argument discredited they take something else out of context…Wash, lather, repeat, the cycle continues. They’re always certain their right but curiously avoid making a rigorous technical argument.
:rolleyes:
LIES!!! ALL LIES! You’re a LM employee trying to fool the highly intelligent folks in here who know better!! This is finally
the start of the F-35s DEATH SPIRAL!!
SolarWardenSo in the end this was exactly what it looked like. A clueless blogger trying to briefly make headlines before being debunked…
An early pre-production aircraft operating without a number of key systems enabled participated in tests intended to refine its flight control system. Not surprisingly, the testers had a variety of recommendations.
This was of course twisted to, “OMG F-35 is doomed… DOOOMED!!!”
What would be a heck of a lot more interesting would be an F-35 flying with its full avionics enabled in an exercise designed to simulate real combat conditions… Red Flag or similar.
Like the anti-F35mites care about the F-35 not having all its systems. This is their win. This is all the have and are going to cling to it for as
long as they can because that is all they got.
Until the F-35b goes IOC and goes up against aggressor squadrons, this will be their shinning moment.
SolarWardenAF-02 is limited in it’s ability to maneuver based on the software block that it has. AF-02 has either 2B or 3i which are both limited to 7g while the F-16, even with empty wing tanks, can do 9g.
He’s purposely not getting it.
SolarWardenWhat do you expect the chief test pilot that works for the company to say. He ends up being little more than a rah rah cheerleader for the airplane and the company.
BTW I am a bed rock conservative, and want our pilots to have the very best tools possible. I want ALL our pilots to come home after EVERY combat engagement!!!!!!
So you now you’ve become a conspiracy theorist? These are Viper and Hornet pilots who now fly F-35 telling us about the performance and comparing
them with the legacy fighters they used to fly. All you got is a leftwing site from a big time lefty hater (David Axe) that got its info from RT (RUSSIA TODAY)
From a unnamed pilot and that is good enough for you and the rest of the anti F-35 intelligentsia? LOl.
I rather take the word from these pilots who actually fly the plane.
SolarWardenI have a few reactions to this story.
First is that the F-35 was never intended to be a dogfighter. The F-16 in its initial form was a WVR only aircraft armed with older (non-HOBS) sidewinders. Its maneuverability in WVR combat was its whole operational concept. The F-35 is designed around a completely different vision of air combat. Its primary design emphasis is on stealth, sensors, and networking… not pure aerodynamic performance. The design team traded aerodynamic performance in exchange for the features that are the design’s primary drivers. The types of tests described by the blog don’t accurately represent how an F-35 would be employed in combat. They don’t really represent how an F-16 would be employed these days either…
Next, as Andraxxus has already said, we lack crucial details to put this in context. What exactly was being practiced? Did these tests include simulated use of the AIM-9x to its full capabilities? (seems unlikely given that the AIM-9x isn’t even integrated yet…) Similarly, what was the avionics fit and software load of the F-35 participating? What version of the helmet was used? Was DAS present/used?
We are dealing with a “five page brief” as summarized by David Axe, a trollish ignoramus. This is the same individual who wrote a story about the F-35 engine fire that opened with ” The F-35 Lightning II is supposed to be America’s primary warplane for the next several decades. But here’s one big problem. The F-35 can catch on fire … just while trying to take off.” This latest blog post of his actually quotes only a handful of complete sentences, and a number of sentence fragments out of a total report he claims is 5 pages long. Where is the rest? This style of quoting is highly suspect because it deprives the reader of needed context.
Pft! LIES! You’re nothing but a LM spokesmen! F-35 DEATH SPIRAL HAS BEGUN!!!!
SolarWardenBecause company employees are your best sources for everything, SW?
Pilots who have flown Vipers and F-35 are best sources. Not leftwing sites with unnamed sources.
SolarWardenIt’s not news until we have sources.
Leftwing source, unnamed pilot + David Axe is good enough for the anti-F-35 crowd. Just look how moist they are getting.
SolarWardenNow we have proof that many of us said about trying to buy a platform that is supposed to be a do all, end all, do everything airplaine. The F-35 is just like the MacNamara F-111 fiasco. The F-35 may be a fair attack bomber, but it is no fighter. No matter what they try to do to this design there is not enough lipstick in the world to make this pig into a world class fighter!!!!!!
The Pentagon should restart the F-23 program. The F-23 should have been bought in the first place since it was much faster, and more stealthy.
Leftwing sites and a unnamed pilot is your proof? Good luck with that. I’ll stick to what these pilots said.
But what do they know, right?
Lol. David Axe.
SolarWardenF-35 criticism in article – MSphere automatically agrees.
F-35 praise in article – MSphere meets it with skepticism and cynicism.
What else would you expect?
SolarWardenSo it’s easier to hide all the (presumably increasing) evidence of alien / government / human interaction?
Really? Have you noted this thing called the internet which enables information to spread at a pace unbelievable even 30 years ago?
Yet there’s not one single piece of solid first hand evidence.
No, just stop, you are being silly or gullible or something else.Was wikileaks all a “lets hide the data about the aliens” scheme perchance hhmm?
These guys get hands on thousands of docs that show various governments in not very good light yet there’s not one thing there about the numerous contacts with the aliens?
That’s some deception scheme, one which they were prepared to sacrifice a whole lot of rather sensitive info to sustain.
Gosh that alien tech must be some whizzy stuff…
Hide? It’s hidden in plain sight. They’ve done a good job (with the media) to make any witness look crazy or misjudge what they see. Any document that comes out is
considered fake. Any news story that has to do with sightings, even mass sightings, is laughed at by the media. They made fun of the Arizona sightings and the StephenVille
mass sightings in Texas. It is always laughed away.
SolarWardenSo it’s easier to hide all the (presumably increasing) evidence of alien / government / human interaction?
Really? Have you noted this thing called the internet which enables information to spread at a pace unbelievable even 30 years ago?
Yet there’s not one single piece of solid first hand evidence.
No, just stop, you are being silly or gullible or something else.Was wikileaks all a “lets hide the data about the aliens” scheme perchance hhmm?
These guys get hands on thousands of docs that show various governments in not very good light yet there’s not one thing there about the numerous contacts with the aliens?
That’s some deception scheme, one which they were prepared to sacrifice a whole lot of rather sensitive info to sustain.
Gosh that alien tech must be some whizzy stuff…
Hide? It’s hidden in plain sight. They’ve done a good job (with the media) to make any witness look crazy or misjudge what they see. Any document that comes out is
considered fake. Any news story that has to do with sightings, even mass sightings, is laughed at by the media. They made fun of the Arizona sightings and the StephenVille
mass sightings in Texas. It is always laughed away.
SolarWardenWhy not?
Moggy
Opening a can of worms. If they did come forward they would have to explain a lot of the lies they told. Why they lied. All the conspiracy theories involving UFOs/E.Ts
would have to be explained if they are real. You’re going to have angry population and the real nut jobs out there will likely start to be followed. Can you imagine a person
like David Icke having credibility and start having a huge following?
SolarWardenWhy not?
Moggy
Opening a can of worms. If they did come forward they would have to explain a lot of the lies they told. Why they lied. All the conspiracy theories involving UFOs/E.Ts
would have to be explained if they are real. You’re going to have angry population and the real nut jobs out there will likely start to be followed. Can you imagine a person
like David Icke having credibility and start having a huge following?
Sign In
